Preview — Six Characters in Search of an Author
by Luigi Pirandello

Six Characters in Search of an Author

Robert Brustein's highly acclaimed adaption of Pirandello's masterpiece, a study in illusion and reality which follows a group of characters who try to fashion their life stories into acceptable drama. Plays for Performance Series.

Paperback, 86 pages

Published
January 1st 1998
by Ivan R. Dee Publisher
(first published March 9th 1921)

Presents a comic (tragic?) and confusing cast of six enigmatic characters seeking an author who can put them inside a 'book'.

They need this badly, so that they can live where they are born to live -- on the stage, and away from this off-stage world of ordinary people, without 'drama' inborn in them. They stumble on a stage and almost manages to get a director to present their story too.

But in the end their play does not manage to get presented -- because howSix Characters in Search of a Stage

Presents a comic (tragic?) and confusing cast of six enigmatic characters seeking an author who can put them inside a 'book'.

They need this badly, so that they can live where they are born to live -- on the stage, and away from this off-stage world of ordinary people, without 'drama' inborn in them. They stumble on a stage and almost manages to get a director to present their story too.

But in the end their play does not manage to get presented -- because how can their story be truly represented without the 'missing' author? Also, who can play them on-stage? Surely they can't be allowed to play themselves! Thus the 'Drama' never materializes. Instead is presented the comedy of their vain attempts at putting their 'drama' 'out there', because, being mere characters, they need an audience all the time! But there is also the tragedy inherent in the situation -- the six characters have been rejected by their author. the author did not consider them worthy of a presentation, since he did not feel anything meaningful about life can be told through their story?

Now what use is your drama if your author did not think it worthy of 'philosophy'? How can you innovate or derive real meaning in the absence of the divine author?

This intricate play needs to be seen on-stage. I could imagine seeing this play and deriving great enjoyment from the bewilderment of the manager etc., but on the lifeless pages of a book it fails to capture me. Continuously imagining it on stage was too exhausting to maintain. I will be looking forward to an opportunity to catch this on the screen or on the stage.

These characters cannot be experienced fully away from their natural habitat. They are made too precisely.

Other Actors. No, no, it's only make believe, it's only pretence!

The Father [with a terrible cry]. Pretence? Reality, sir, reality!

The Manager. Pretence? Reality? To hell with it all! Never in my life has such a thing happened to me. I 've lost a whole day over these people, a whole day!...more

They say I was born in June. The day, the year somehow ceases to exist. I live with my mother. She stares at the wall, singing songs unnoticing my existence in the house. Is this how being an orphan feels like? I used to work at Madame Pace’s dress shop. Only it wasn't a dress shop. It was a whore house where I used to entertain clients throughout the night. My mother was unaware of my earnings, but as if it mattered. Then, one day I fell in love. In fact, I fell in love with his eyes. The sameThey say I was born in June. The day, the year somehow ceases to exist. I live with my mother. She stares at the wall, singing songs unnoticing my existence in the house. Is this how being an orphan feels like? I used to work at Madame Pace’s dress shop. Only it wasn't a dress shop. It was a whore house where I used to entertain clients throughout the night. My mother was unaware of my earnings, but as if it mattered. Then, one day I fell in love. In fact, I fell in love with his eyes. The same brown affectionate eyes that I own. They were so memorable, they were mine. I could see myself in them. My eyes on this strange face, mesmerizing yet daunting. He was my client, elderly yet so affectionate. Months went by, but he never visited me again. I looked for him but no avail. They say, he shot himself out of guilt. He was my biological father. The shame of seducing his own blood ate him up after finding my truth. So, as I lay in a pool of blood, the cold metal burning against my sinful hands, I pierce the sharp edge into the warm blob of flesh. I killed my baby. I killed my brother. I practically cease to exist now. Shame and numbness has weighed my soul into nothingness. The man once my mother had left my father for took her away. So, here I come to you with an unfilled life and an unfinished story pleading you to bring an authored conclusion.

“Yes”, I affirm, “The settings should be realistic and the truth should be told in its unaltered form.”

“I am an unrealized character sir”, I humbly say, “I need you to finish my story and bring it to life”.

The stage manager now enraged walks away hurling obscenities and muttering, “Acting is our business here. Truth up to a certain point, but no further”; as he looks at me with a sardonic smile.

Pirandello illuminates the ‘Theatre of Absurd’ genre in this bizarre performance. A form of drama that emphasizes the absurdity of human existence by employing disjointed, repetitious and meaningless dialogue, purposeless and confusing situations and plots that lack realistic or logical development. Purely in its theatrical form he depicts a tale of six characters in search of an author who is able not only to complete their fragmentary story but to perform their ingenuous legitimacy. A story which is not a story after all. Through the numerous arguments between the six characters and the stage manager about portrayal of reality in its unaltered state to the audiences marks the debate of life reality v/s stage reality. The sense of illusion what is illustrated to be a reality on performance stage is far from the factual forms.

The plethora of reality television that demarcates an entire generation outlook mutates the genuineness of its characters. How real are the nuances of these actors who state publicly that their respected shows are not scripted but spontaneous? The movies that state ‘based on a true story’, how far do they enact the truth or is pragmatism edited to normalization of absurdity. Pirandello stresses on the theatre being an illusion of reality where actors masquerade real emotions through rehearsals and mutability.

A brilliant existentialism perception of individuals being characters all through their life portraying roles that they're born into and the normality of emotions attached to their specific roles. Who are we? The roles that we are born into or the tangible roles we want to play....more

Oh, this play is great. What a fucking thing it is. It's about how we create our own realities: how each of us choose to play a character, to such an extent that we sometimes sit outside ourselves, watching our characters act out their scenes. And it's about the subjective nature of reality: how to each of us, the scenes we live through may be be completely different to each actor in them.

I was talking to a friend recently about the beginning of our relationship, and discovered that her perceptiOh, this play is great. What a fucking thing it is. It's about how we create our own realities: how each of us choose to play a character, to such an extent that we sometimes sit outside ourselves, watching our characters act out their scenes. And it's about the subjective nature of reality: how to each of us, the scenes we live through may be be completely different to each actor in them.

I was talking to a friend recently about the beginning of our relationship, and discovered that her perception of that period has almost nothing in common with mine. If we both explained it to a third party, we would tell wholly different stories. Weird, huh? Both of our stories are equally true; they're just different.

Recently, in an unguarded moment, a different friend of mine let slip who he thinks I am. It was not at all who I think I am! Among other things, his version of me - inexplicably - is not a Viking. I'm pretty sure he was projecting there, but how would I know? Is there anyone less qualified to interpret me than me?

This is what Pirandello's dealing with, at least until Act III when he starts to talk about the writing process and also to wrap up his own plot. It's a very smart play, and years ahead of its time. My character enjoys it. A character under that thinks it's a little show-offy. A character under that is scared that he didn't get it at all, and a character under that is afraid that his opinion hasn't even been written....more

'Oh sir, you know well that life is full of infinite absurdities, which, strangely enough, do not even need to appear plausible, since they are true.'

As the title suggests, the storyline is loosely based on 6 characters who want to vocalize themselves to any author who would give life to them. They enter a rehearsal studio, where a play is unfolding and ask the Director to become their author. Even when the Director objects, they start to narrate their story and after he is intrigued, he accepts'Oh sir, you know well that life is full of infinite absurdities, which, strangely enough, do not even need to appear plausible, since they are true.'

As the title suggests, the storyline is loosely based on 6 characters who want to vocalize themselves to any author who would give life to them. They enter a rehearsal studio, where a play is unfolding and ask the Director to become their author. Even when the Director objects, they start to narrate their story and after he is intrigued, he accepts to become their author.

' So one may also be born a character in a play.'

Act I begins with what the characters have to share. Their story is one but the perception of it is varied for all the six characters, thereby creating tension in the household. The main character feels that the whole trouble lies in words because each man has his own special world. And so, the characters begin to give their version of the story and in it we can observe their justifications for such acts.

In Act II, the Director asks his studio actors to play the parts of the 6 characters, but the characters do not recognize themselves in the actors. They point out the little facts that are missed when the Director tries to put their story on stage. They state that the facts are as important as the story.

'But a fact is like a sack which won't stand up when it is empty. In order that it may stand up, one has to put into it the reason and sentiment which have aused it to exist.'

Act III ends with the merging of reality and acting, which the Director chastises as pretense and dismisses the whole story as a waste of time.

I enjoyed being in the minds of all the characters, including the Director who sees this as a potential story instead of judging the characters for their feats. The exploration of how there is a distortion of reality when a story is being acted is also well written. The book turned out to be confusing by superimposing a play within a play. Had Act II and Act II been as monumental as Act I, I would have rated this theater piece 5 stars. ...more

This is by far THE best play I have ever read (not that I have read too many to compare it with, but I did plow through a dozen of classical plays -mainly initially written and performed in French- in high school and I still remember, very vividly, how boring and barely engaging they were).

This play is relatively fast and short; the style is not flowery, either. However, despite its fast paced style and succinctness, it is guaranteed to keep the readers cogitating while, and after, reading it.This is by far THE best play I have ever read (not that I have read too many to compare it with, but I did plow through a dozen of classical plays -mainly initially written and performed in French- in high school and I still remember, very vividly, how boring and barely engaging they were).

This play is relatively fast and short; the style is not flowery, either. However, despite its fast paced style and succinctness, it is guaranteed to keep the readers cogitating while, and after, reading it. Very rarely did I come across a statement uttered by one of the "characters" that did not "force" me, as it were, to slow down the pace of my reading -even bringing it to a half sometimes- and think about the depth that lies behind the "simple facade" of the work.

Being a big fan of theater, I would always imagine, especially at a younger age, the entire world as being one huge stage upon which people would put on scenes daily and around the clock. I would imagine that every single person in the world is an actor who works so devotedly to deliver a perfect performance of his/her part, assigned by one [unknown to me] director who observes everyone simultaneously and gauges how good their performances are. I had been looking for a work of fiction (or even a nonfiction philosophy book or essay) that depicted this theme for years before I came across this play.

I recommend you read this play if you are a fan of literature, theater, philosophy and/or the numerous existentialist questions it poses. If this review remotely sparks your interest in any way, I think you should go check out the book at the nearest library, crack it open, and give it a chance.

It is an interesting concept and creatively executed to its finesse by Luigi Pirandello.

It is a play in which six abandoned characters (apparently abandoned by another author in the midst of the creative process) go in search of an author to get a LIFE/to become REAL. In their search they come across a drama troupe that is ready to do a rehearsal for a play. The encounter between the characters and the actors form the rest of the play.

Obviously it is a play in which the drama critic of PirandelIt is an interesting concept and creatively executed to its finesse by Luigi Pirandello.

It is a play in which six abandoned characters (apparently abandoned by another author in the midst of the creative process) go in search of an author to get a LIFE/to become REAL. In their search they come across a drama troupe that is ready to do a rehearsal for a play. The encounter between the characters and the actors form the rest of the play.

Obviously it is a play in which the drama critic of Pirandello comes alive with philosophical musings on drama/theater, characters, the actors' ability to act out a character, the creative process, etc.

The theories related to theater are presented to the public in a didactic and yet comic (?) manner.

Let me explain this with some interesting dialogues or excerpts:

WHAT IS A DRAMA?

"...your art is a kind of game, in which you try very hard to present a perfect illusion of reality."

WHAT IS A CHARACTER?

"My dear sir, a character can always ask a man who he is. Because a character genuinely has a life of his own, distinguished by its own individual characteristics, which means that he is always 'somebody'. A man, on the other hand can be 'nobody'."

WHO IS REAL - A CHARACTER OR THE REAL PERSON?

"It's just to show you that if we [the characters] have no other reality beyond illusion, then you [the actors, the real people] too would do well not to trust in your own reality - the living and breathing reality you enjoy today - because just like yesterday's reality, that too is destined to be exposed as an illusion tomorrow...[For] your reality can change, from one day to the next..."

"What for you [the actors, the real people] is an illusion to be created [the acting out of drama], is for us [the characters] our unique reality." And that does not change; it is permanent - a father-character designed as a regretting person, remains a regretting person for eternity.

In short, Pirandello directly tells on the face of the people that it is we (the so called REAL people) who are with masks and not the characters that appear on the stage.

It is a philosophical play and he has made it appear like a comedy. But I am not sure, how people would react to it. Interestingly when it was first staged, the audience jeered at it as a stupid play. I will like to see it being staged to make my own judgment. For reading, it was an interesting and a philosophical play....more

I really enjoyed this satirical, twisting look at theatre and the nature of reality. The characters each have competing views of the reality of their drama, just as people in real life have differing views of the same event. The play-within-a-play staging sets up a self-referentiality that I found at once thought-provoking and hilarious. A wonderful play that I highly recommend.

“Oh sir, you know well that life is full of infinite absurdities, which, strangely enough, do not even need to appear plausible, since they are true.”

Absurdity? Lunacy? Whimsicality? Perhaps all this and well, all this not!

This delightful play has a rather unique premise. A set of theatre actors are about to rehearse a play when six “characters” come unannounced and demand that their story be told. They express their utter condescension on being orphaned by their “AuthorCharacteristically Tall

“Oh sir, you know well that life is full of infinite absurdities, which, strangely enough, do not even need to appear plausible, since they are true.”

Absurdity? Lunacy? Whimsicality? Perhaps all this and well, all this not!

This delightful play has a rather unique premise. A set of theatre actors are about to rehearse a play when six “characters” come unannounced and demand that their story be told. They express their utter condescension on being orphaned by their “Author” before granting completeness to them and request rebirth by allowing them to play their story to an audience through the theatre. The Manager (or The Director) of the play is, at first, perplexed with their submissions but gradually gets drawn into their quirksome justifications. The “characters” win the manager’s consent when they successfully sow the seed of the “Author” into The Manager and the latter gets totally flattered by the proposition. Donning the hat of the “Author”-cum-“Manager” then, he goes about decoding these characters’ sob story and converting them into theatre-worthy form. But the task he undertakes turns out to be far complex than he had assumed and after a point, he loses sight of the line between veracity and falsity.

Now, that makes for a good play for us!

The wailing chain of accusation binding The Mother and The Son, although strong, fades in the light of the conversation between The Father and The Step-Daughter, which are laced with as much solidarity as contempt. The other two characters, The Boy and The Child, although mute spectators, are important to the play like the lifeless props that complete a scene, if not define it. The shadow casted by the characters”, render the “actors” superfluous, albeit not before drenching them in some comic rain.

Although the plot in itself is a charming one, the structure is of good verve too. And the entire work is interspersed with some insightful lines which I totally, totally loved. I could not agree more when The Father utters, “But a fact is like a sack which won’t stand up when it is empty.” Or when The Manager says in exasperation, “You represent the shell of the eggs you are beating! The empty form of reason without the fullness of instinct, which is blind.”

It is a small, yet, striking tribute to the life of a good “character”, which once sketched in good foundation, grows without clutches, on its own strength. A funny take but a reflective one. And I nodded in sobriety when the father concedes:

“…because he who has had the luck to be born a character can laugh even at death. He cannot die.”...more

But for the random, Chekhovian ending, a clever metaplay. Six characters show up at a rehearsal for a different, fictional Pirandello play ("The Game As He Played It," the title of which refers to this play we're watching, since, as one of the characters says, "acting is a game"). The characters demand that since their story is worth telling, worth putting on stage, the director ought to stage it. The characters and the actors quarrel over how to do so, the characters preferring accuracy, faithfBut for the random, Chekhovian ending, a clever metaplay. Six characters show up at a rehearsal for a different, fictional Pirandello play ("The Game As He Played It," the title of which refers to this play we're watching, since, as one of the characters says, "acting is a game"). The characters demand that since their story is worth telling, worth putting on stage, the director ought to stage it. The characters and the actors quarrel over how to do so, the characters preferring accuracy, faithfulness to what really happened, and the actors preferring beauty, drama, excitement, editing reality for their purposes. This is the struggle that goes on inside of every writer.

But most of us are not writers; writers are not important. What's really interesting about this work is the different interpretations of the same story that are played out between those within the story (the subjective interpretations of the characters) and the objective (?) interpretations of those outside of it, the director and the actors. In our ordinary lives, we see this impossibility of self-understanding all the time: we do not know whether we are in the beginning, middle, or end of our story, and so we have no frame of reference as to the significance of anything that happens to us, or of anything that we do. Can a fly on a pet rock know that its purpose is to hold down papers? Can a goldfish in a bowl understand the objective significance of the bowl, rather than the subjective significance? This is the problem of meaning that we all face. We are within a vast universe that can only be understood from without; for us to have meaning, we need to hear from The Director.

The characters' story is pretty juicy though: a girl's father dies, and she has a one-night stand with her stepfather, shaming everyone in the family for the rest of their lives, leading, ostensibly to the otherwise random I'm-stuck-get-me-out-of-this-play suicide that Pirandello puts at the end....more

This is an interesting play written in three acts. The entire proceedings take place at a theatre where an acting company have got together to rehearse a play by Pirandello. As is usually the case, this is by-the-book rehearsal when they are interrupted by the arrival of six Characters. These six Characters, you see, are in search of an author because the author who created them was not able to put them on stage. They convince the manager for opportunity to try out their drama. What follows is tThis is an interesting play written in three acts. The entire proceedings take place at a theatre where an acting company have got together to rehearse a play by Pirandello. As is usually the case, this is by-the-book rehearsal when they are interrupted by the arrival of six Characters. These six Characters, you see, are in search of an author because the author who created them was not able to put them on stage. They convince the manager for opportunity to try out their drama. What follows is the Characters playing their roles on the scene; the manager taking down their parts and trying them with his cast. The story of these Characters is tragic. The Characters are cast in their roles and the drama they carry with them – the Father projected primarily as the pervert, Mother as the sufferer, the Step Daughter as the narcissist avenger, the Son who wants to escape.

The play is brilliantly written and brings out wonderfully the •Combination of theatre within theatre•Characters living the part and defining them •Reality versus an illusion of reality – at levels of actor/character, at individual level where our actions are determined by our illusion regarding the consequences.

It is a fairly short play; but don’t be misled - it is a difficult to digest in first read. There are some amusing dialogues in between, but what you 'feel' most of times is the tragedy, remorse, anguish of the characters and at times, pity. The ending is little disturbing – but is it an illusion or a reality?

I might raise the rating at a later time, when I read it again. But as of now, will go with a 3 star rating....more

When six characters come to life but are refused by their author, they go looking for another person to write their story down. They barge into a rehearsal session of a Pirandello play and what ensues is a brilliant reflection on the status of characters, actors and authors in literary texts, and more specifically theatre.

'Sei Personaggi' reads like a comedy, is rich in hilarious moments but is in fact a drama. The six characters insist on the fact that their story is a rich drama waiting to beWhen six characters come to life but are refused by their author, they go looking for another person to write their story down. They barge into a rehearsal session of a Pirandello play and what ensues is a brilliant reflection on the status of characters, actors and authors in literary texts, and more specifically theatre.

'Sei Personaggi' reads like a comedy, is rich in hilarious moments but is in fact a drama. The six characters insist on the fact that their story is a rich drama waiting to be told. The core of the story, which unravels in a very smart way, is about the incestuous relationship between Le Père et La Belle-Fille. At the same time, the other story-line is that of the characters trying to convince the theatre director to become their author.

I found 'Sei Personaggi' especially brilliant in the way it treated the relationship between actors and their role. The main message is that any theatre is doomed to fail, as an actor is unable to become his role. In fact, Pirandello even suggests that the characters are much more real than their actors, as an actor changes roles quite often. The story of a character, par contre, is always fixed and pre-determined. There's a scene where the Son, who refuses to be part of the quest for an author, is studied by the actors, who want to mimic his expressions and intonation. It's a brilliant scene that clearly shows the main problem of art in relationship with its subject. How can an artist interiorise the external world, only to externalise it again afterwards? Wherein lie the limits of art?

The ending of 'Sei Personaggi' is rather brilliant - I won't give away anything here, but if you've read it, please do feel free to enter a discussion. It's riveting stuff, really. Recommended for all those who take a keen interest in art and other forms of representation....more

This absurdist play is dense, but so totally dench. A director and his company are preparing to rehearse the second act of Pirandello’s play Rules of the Game, barely able to get in 5 lines progress out of the rehearsal before the enigmatic Six Characters interrupt and take over as if they’re the descendants of the Ancient Mariner, burdened to the point they have to unburden themselves again and again. A Father, a Mother, their legitimate Son, and the mother’s three children from another marriagThis absurdist play is dense, but so totally dench. A director and his company are preparing to rehearse the second act of Pirandello’s play Rules of the Game, barely able to get in 5 lines progress out of the rehearsal before the enigmatic Six Characters interrupt and take over as if they’re the descendants of the Ancient Mariner, burdened to the point they have to unburden themselves again and again. A Father, a Mother, their legitimate Son, and the mother’s three children from another marriage (the Stepdaughter, Young Boy and Little Girl) are in search of an author having been abandoned by the one who created them. It’s a Tristram Shandy kind of set-up: nothing is achieved simply or quickly; rehearsal for Rules of the Game is abandoned, both enactment by characters of their story and attempted reiteration by actors are unable to start, end or barely progress without a fair few interruptions and arguments. One of the six characters laughs all the way fully aware the tragedy played out ‘happening now, it’s happening all the time’ is a farce the second time performed.

Pirandello utilises this play to set forth questions and discussions on the nature of character, performance and all the consequences entailed. In many ways this play reminded me of Clarice Lispector’s A Breath of Life because of the unresolved Characters who have lost their way; the Father makes a point of how characters as a creation live on after their author has died, later on saying ‘a character genuinely has a life of his own, distinguished by its own individual characteristics, which means that he is always ‘somebody’. A man, on the other hand – I’m not saying you in particular, but man in general – can be ‘nobody’.’ Shakespeare might have invented the human in his characters, but characters will always be that certain character: attempting to fashion yourself as a particular character ends up a parody (as Tatiana discovers in Eugene Onegin). Pirandello apparently had this big thing about man and life in a constant state of flux, no hope of controlling it despite illusions and masks. As you can see, though Pirandello presents the Six Characters masked and costumed to indicate their roles eternal to ‘stay there on the script’ alone, in dialogue and action they appear very much real and dynamic regardless. Both the Father and Stepdaughter are quite self-aware of themselves as conscious puppets, what with many of the Father’s lines littered with discourse like the above.

In sociolinguistics one of the biggest questions you’re asked to answer when outlining methodology for a field investigation is “how will you overcome observer’s paradox?” ‘Observer’s paradox’ is a term coined by the linguist William Labov to essentially define the difficulty in eliciting natural responses from a subject who is aware of being observed. Think of it as the linguistic variation of when Schiller says that self-consciousness is the enemy of play: “Now I see myself in the act of creating and fashioning; I observe the play of inspiration, and my imagination works less freely, since it is conscious of being watched.”

And it is that gulf between reality and performance within a person that interests me the most in this particular play. We all know how it is to realise that the way you perceive yourself isn’t the way others will perceive you. I’ve seen a couple of sitcom episodes where the characters are faced with actors playing out their lives (though I can only remember Blossom off the top of my head), and the characters’ responses range from admiration of a completely wrong interpretation to those feeling insulted by a performance that is close to the way they act seen by the audience. However, it’s not only that, but also the reality/performance in self as well. At one point one of the characters remarks ‘It’s as if I’m hearing my own words false’. It can’t just be me, but as an example, I can only cry sorrow by myself, if someone catches me crying and I’m aware of them there watching me, the tears immediately feel fake. Even though I feel this emotion, when it comes to expressing this in front of others, it feels like it’s sliding into performance. Observer’s paradox.

I could go on and on about how you all should read this play, because of x, y, z reasons and another whole alphabet of thoughts, comparisons with other texts, experiences, etc. But I’ll let The Director interrupt and abruptly finish this one off for me:

DIRECTOR …You’ve got to maintain some sort of balanced ensemble, to show what needs to be shown. And I’m perfectly well aware that we all have our own inner life, that we’d love to open up to the world. But that’s what’s so difficult – we have to bring out only what’s essential, in relation to the other characters and somehow use that to hint at the life within. I mean, it would be just too convenient if every character was allowed a soliloquy – or better still, a lecture – to dish up to the audience whatever’s cooking inside them! ...more

Six Characters in Search of an Author is an interesting exploration into the idea that characters in a work of fiction have some kind of Platonic form that is only imitated or hinted at when actors perform a theatrical work. In some ways it's a deconstruction of a play in that it's more about the writing and performing of a play than it is a play in itself. In the play, six characters from a play that never got written come to visit a theatrical troupe and try to convince the troupe to perform tSix Characters in Search of an Author is an interesting exploration into the idea that characters in a work of fiction have some kind of Platonic form that is only imitated or hinted at when actors perform a theatrical work. In some ways it's a deconstruction of a play in that it's more about the writing and performing of a play than it is a play in itself. In the play, six characters from a play that never got written come to visit a theatrical troupe and try to convince the troupe to perform their story. I enjoyed it, but it gets somewhat heavy-handed at points (not sure how much of that is the author's fault and how much the translator's) and the author goes a bit overboard throwing in self-referential remarks (the troupe is rehearsing a Pirandello play when the six characters interrupt them, and the director repeatedly insults the play and its author). Overall an enjoyable read, and quick enough that one can forgive its shortcomings....more

I admit it surpassed my expectations. Really mind-boggling and a brilliant way of using absurd characters and a stage which reflects us-humans and the life or the world we live in. We are each inclined to think we are somebody when in fact everybody is nobody. I wouldn't go extreme and say that this is the absolute interpretation of the play, but it is really up to the audience who in the end might turn out to be a collection of characters themselves, set on a stage, for another audience to judgI admit it surpassed my expectations. Really mind-boggling and a brilliant way of using absurd characters and a stage which reflects us-humans and the life or the world we live in. We are each inclined to think we are somebody when in fact everybody is nobody. I wouldn't go extreme and say that this is the absolute interpretation of the play, but it is really up to the audience who in the end might turn out to be a collection of characters themselves, set on a stage, for another audience to judge and observe. Or are we the characters and the audience at the same time....more

SIX CHARACTERS IN SEARCH OF AN AUTHOR. (1921). Luigi Pirandello. ****. If you read any of the short biographies of Pirandello on the web, you will get an idea of where the plots of some of his plays originated. This play is probably his most popular one, and relatively accessible for the reader. Luigi Pirandello (1867-1936) was born in Sicily in the town now called Agrigento. We have visited there, and were impressed by all of the buildings still standing and in good shape dating from the GreekSIX CHARACTERS IN SEARCH OF AN AUTHOR. (1921). Luigi Pirandello. ****. If you read any of the short biographies of Pirandello on the web, you will get an idea of where the plots of some of his plays originated. This play is probably his most popular one, and relatively accessible for the reader. Luigi Pirandello (1867-1936) was born in Sicily in the town now called Agrigento. We have visited there, and were impressed by all of the buildings still standing and in good shape dating from the Greek and Roman times. That’s beside the point, but his town is now a tourist attraction of the first order. There is a piazza named after him, and, even a bust of him in a park in Palermo. He won the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1934. Back to this play. Think of its form as being from the Theater of the Absurd. In fact, it actually predates many of those works. The plot is simple: A theater group is rehearsing a play – presumably a play by Pirandello – when six characters walk in on the stage. They are called, simply, Mother, Father, Son, etc. They are characters from a play that the author has not finished, or has abandoned. They still have a story to tell, but need an author to set it down on paper so that they can get on with it. The director of the play being rehearsed on the stage tries to help them out, but he becomes confused as to what their purpose is. The “Father” character tries to explain who they are to the stage manager: “…that which is a game of art for you is our sole reality…a character may always ask a man who he is. Because a character has really a life of his own, marked with his especial characteristics, for which reasoning is always ‘somebody.’ But a man…may well be ‘nobody.’” This is a glimpse into the mind of the playwright who managed to change the way we look at the play writing process. Recommended....more

This book was literally amazing. I was drowned into awesomeness every page. Every word the characters said were intelligent, but in some ways a little bit bizarre. You do not meet every day Characters who escaped of a book, but not only escape, their author set them free. The characters were looking for an author, but they may never find him. They are their own author, they are creating their own life stories. They are damned to repeat their story every day, for an eternity, waiting for an authoThis book was literally amazing. I was drowned into awesomeness every page. Every word the characters said were intelligent, but in some ways a little bit bizarre. You do not meet every day Characters who escaped of a book, but not only escape, their author set them free. The characters were looking for an author, but they may never find him. They are their own author, they are creating their own life stories. They are damned to repeat their story every day, for an eternity, waiting for an author to stop this continuity, an author who may never show up to take his responsability.Pirandello succeded in a magnificent way to combine comedy with drama. The Characters' story was dramatic, it was powerful, even though they could not express it. They were unable to truly express their feelings towards not only to each other, but to the story. They could not even finish telling the story, only a few scenes. The events had no continuity, but it kept everybody very intrigued by it. You would never know what they were going to say next or how they would feel towards a given situation. The Charactera were, of course, different from each other. They were completting each other, but were really opposed, on different extremities.I might get it wrong though, but I feel like the Characters were trying to show the world their never-ending story, but were traped into a vicious circle and could not do this. Not because they were not believed, but because they could not say anything. Their story was inside them, it was their own soul. People have their souls inside them and the Characters had their story inside them. The story was getting bigger and bigger, it wanted to escape the body and be set free, but the Characters could not do that even for themselves. If the story got out, they would die. The story chains them to live, it gives them breath and a purpose in life. The story is governing their own life and all they are able to do is live it differently every day, even if it is the same.Totally recommend....more

“THE FATHER: But don't you see that the whole trouble lies here? In words, words. Each one of us has within him a whole world of things, each man of us his own special world. And how can we ever come to an understanding if I put in the words I utter the sense and value of things as I see them; while you who listen to me must inevitably translate them according to the conception of things each one of you has within himself. We think we understand each other, but we never really do.”
—
59 likes

“Life is full of strange absurdities, which, strangely enough, do not even need to appear plausible, since they are true.”
—
27 likes